SUPREME COURT: Birth-control feud reveals deadlocked high court

In this June 30, 2014 file photo, demonstrators react to hearing the Supreme Court's decision on the Hobby Lobby birth control case outside the Supreme Court in Washington. The Supreme Court rid itself Monday of a knotty dispute between faith-based groups and the Obama administration over birth control. The court asked lower courts to take another look at the issue in a search for a compromise.

More from this story

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday backed out of a divisive clash involving religious groups that object to contraceptive coverage under Obamacare, issuing a compromise decision that said the two sides might be able to work out their differences.

The decision has no immediate impact in California, where many residents working for religious employers and faith-based organizations already have access to the full range of birth control methods through Medi-Cal under state law.

“Californians are still protected. This decision does not modify this, as far as we can see,” said Charles Stewart, communications director for the legislator who wrote the law, Sen. Holly Mitchell, D-Los Angeles.

However, a legislative advocate for the local Planned Parenthood said the ruling leaves questions about whether bosses can deny employees’ access to free or “no copay” birth control in the future.

The Supreme Court justices Monday asked lower courts to take another look at the issue in a search for a compromise. The case concerns the administration's arrangement for sparing faith-based groups from having to pay for birth control for women covered under their health plans.

Releasing an unsigned, unanimous, seven-paragraph opinion in one of its most closely watched disputes, the court said it “expresses no view on the merits of the cases” and sent them back to federal appeals courts.

The opinion pointed to an unusual proposal the justices floated in March after arguments suggested a 4-4 deadlock. The decision underscored the court’s difficulties since the vacancy created by Justice Antonin Scalia’s death Feb. 13.

Options Offered

At issue was the Obama administration’s plan to accommodate religious groups that don’t want to provide birth control coverage for employees or students.

The administration offered objecting groups two options: They could shift responsibility onto their insurer by providing it with a “self-certification” form, or could notify the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services of their objection and provide contact information for their insurer.

The religious groups, which consider some forms of contraception to be the same as abortion, say they shouldn’t have to play even the limited role envisioned by the administration. The groups sued, claiming violation of a federal religious-rights law.

Menifee Mayor Scott Mann, chairman of the Republican Party of Riverside County, described the court’s decision as a “hollow victory.”

“Republicans believe that government has no business mandating contraceptive care for all Americans. That should be a choice,” he said.

U.S. Rep. Ken Calvert, R-Corona, agreed.

“Our religious organizations should be protected from government mandates that infringe upon their liberties,” he said in a prepared statement. “I’m hopeful the religious groups affected by this case can finally find relief from these Obamacare mandates in the near future.”

The full impact of court’s ruling may not be known until lower courts take action or return the matter to the Supreme Court, said Claudia Huerta, legislative and political engagement manager for Planned Parenthood of the Pacific Southwest, which operates in Riverside County.

“We hope that the lower court can provide a clear resolution that protects women by ensuring access to birth control no matter where they work and where they live,” she said.

The court said, in the interim, the government was free to take steps – presumably by contacting insurance companies – to ensure people working for the suing groups can receive contraceptives at no cost.

The identity of the next justice and the fate of the contraceptive policy may have to wait for the presidential election in November.

<!-- The following message will be displayed to users with unsupported browsers: --> Your browser does not support the iframe HTML tag. Try viewing this in a modern browser like Chrome, Safari, Firefox or Internet Explorer 9 or later.

Join the conversation

We invite you to use our commenting platform to engage in insightful
conversations about issues in our community. Although we do not pre-screen comments,
we reserve the right at all times to remove any information or materials that are unlawful,
threatening, abusive, libelous, defamatory, obscene, vulgar, pornographic, profane, indecent
or otherwise objectionable to us, and to disclose any information necessary to satisfy the law,
regulation, or government request. We might permanently block any user who abuses these conditions.